http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483 Always select Genuine Rant™ Brand. Everything else is just words. Wed, 08 Sep 2010 22:38:51 -0400 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28497 Millard Baker Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:08:49 +0000 http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28497 Hi Slap Me Some More, The prosecutor only provided evidence that Patrick Arnold gave Tammy Thomas three substances: 1-AD, THG and norbolethone. The jury found her GUILTY of taking substances obtained from Patrick Arnold (count 3) but not knowingly obtaining banned or illegal substances from Pat (count 2). Consequently, I don't think "chain of transfer" was an issue... The jury could have used other evidence of steroid use (as you suggest) namely the positive steroid test for norbolethone and/or the medical testimony of virilization. But using this as proof of guilt is still inconsistent with rest of decision - I elaborate on this in Steroid Report...
The prosecutor only provided evidence that Patrick Arnold gave Tammy Thomas three substances: 1-AD, THG and norbolethone.

The jury found her GUILTY of taking substances obtained from Patrick Arnold (count 3) but not knowingly obtaining banned or illegal substances from Pat (count 2).

Consequently, I don’t think “chain of transfer” was an issue…

The jury could have used other evidence of steroid use (as you suggest) namely the positive steroid test for norbolethone and/or the medical testimony of virilization. But using this as proof of guilt is still inconsistent with rest of decision – I elaborate on this in Steroid Report…]]> http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28494 Analysis of Tammy Thomas Verdict | Steroid Report Thu, 10 Apr 2008 08:57:12 +0000 http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28494 [...] Now that perjury trial of Tammy Thomas has concluded, it will be interesting to see how the government’s “new anti-doping weapon” is used against Barry Bonds and other athletes. [...] http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28449 Jean C Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:50:00 +0000 http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28449 Doping is as old as the ancient greek Olympic Games with their first "AAF"! http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28375 Rant Thu, 10 Apr 2008 04:24:40 +0000 http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28375 Susie B,<br /> I think you'll find plenty of pre-Ben Johnson, pre-Festina doping stories in the book, which you use to edify your friend. I just posted a bit of my take on the Trek-LeMond thing. It's personal, and it's about money is pretty much how I see it.
I think you’ll find plenty of pre-Ben Johnson, pre-Festina doping stories in the book, which you use to edify your friend. I just posted a bit of my take on the Trek-LeMond thing. It’s personal, and it’s about money is pretty much how I see it.]]> http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28349 William Schart Thu, 10 Apr 2008 03:19:35 +0000 http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28349 Michael: Point taken. I do admit that sometimes, a perjury prosecution seems to be vindictive. Prosecutors do not like being lied to or otherwise having their investigations interfered with, so I think they tend to come down whenever they can. However, the last 2 prezes, GD, etc., etc., to the best of my knowledge have not given testimony about their drug use under oath. There is a big difference, legally speaking, between lying and committing perjury. Outside of court, anyone can say anything, but once you put your hand on that Bible and take the oath, it's a whole new ballgame. This is true even if you personally are not involved in a crime. If you witness your best buddy commit a crime and lie about it under oath, you have committed perjury even though you committed no other crime.
Point taken. I do admit that sometimes, a perjury prosecution seems to be vindictive. Prosecutors do not like being lied to or otherwise having their investigations interfered with, so I think they tend to come down whenever they can.

However, the last 2 prezes, GD, etc., etc., to the best of my knowledge have not given testimony about their drug use under oath. There is a big difference, legally speaking, between lying and committing perjury. Outside of court, anyone can say anything, but once you put your hand on that Bible and take the oath, it’s a whole new ballgame. This is true even if you personally are not involved in a crime. If you witness your best buddy commit a crime and lie about it under oath, you have committed perjury even though you committed no other crime.]]> http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28107 susie b Wed, 09 Apr 2008 19:31:12 +0000 http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28107 Hi Rant, thanks for answering my questions last Friday & I think you may be correct that the UCI sued Pound to keep him from becoming the head of CAS. If it's true, I think SOMEone at UCI was using the old noggin for once. Do you think they'll drop the suit now? Have you heard anything else about the FFC's request to ASO to get Paris-Roubaix (& I'm assuming their other races) back on a UCI calendar? I haven't been able to read the cycling sites the past couple days, so don't know if there's been any development on that front. Also, I'm SO excited about your book! I will definitely be buying a copy. I can't wait to trot out any information that will convince my non-cyclingfan friends that sports doping did not start & end with cycling. I've been throwing the East German women's swim team at them for years & I need "new material". :) What's your take on the Trek-LeMond skirmish? Do you think either suit will actually get to a court? That would be popcorn worthy for sure. And one of these days, I'll be able to once again read your current post & all the comments in a timely fashion so I can join in on a post's actual topic along with everyone else. Thanks for not rapping my knuckles. :)
Have you heard anything else about the FFC’s request to ASO to get Paris-Roubaix (& I’m assuming their other races) back on a UCI calendar? I haven’t been able to read the cycling sites the past couple days, so don’t know if there’s been any development on that front.

Also, I’m SO excited about your book! I will definitely be buying a copy. I can’t wait to trot out any information that will convince my non-cyclingfan friends that sports doping did not start & end with cycling. I’ve been throwing the East German women’s swim team at them for years & I need “new material”.

What’s your take on the Trek-LeMond skirmish? Do you think either suit will actually get to a court? That would be popcorn worthy for sure.

And one of these days, I’ll be able to once again read your current post & all the comments in a timely fashion so I can join in on a post’s actual topic along with everyone else. Thanks for not rapping my knuckles. ]]> http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28093 Michael Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:38:52 +0000 http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28093 William, I don't really feel anything for Tammy one way or the other. She was a cheat, and not very smart. My beef is that the government should never be allowed to justify the conviction of a person by saying that the convict is not nice, or unlikeable, or cheated at tidily-winks. People didn't like Martha Stewart, so didn't care that she was convicted of lying about not committing a crime. And she's rich anyway, and rich people can only get rich by cheating people (sarcasm intended). The government says she cheated but admit that what she did wasn't criminal. However she didn't tell the government the truth about her legal activities so she goes to jail. How can anyone support that on ethical grounds? Now Tammy used prescription drugs illegally - so did Rush Limbaugh, Don Imus, The Greatful Dead, the last two presidents, in addition to millions of other people. They're not in jail because they weren't part of a Morgan-esque granny-gate. But I believe that most people, if put under oath, would be challenged to tell the whole truth. Devotion to liberty should be paramount here - if the underlying crime is not a felony it should make us feel very uneasy when the government puts people in jail for lying. But I would agree that Tammy couldn't be the sharpest tack in the box. And is clearly morally challenged.
My beef is that the government should never be allowed to justify the conviction of a person by saying that the convict is not nice, or unlikeable, or cheated at tidily-winks. People didn’t like Martha Stewart, so didn’t care that she was convicted of lying about not committing a crime. And she’s rich anyway, and rich people can only get rich by cheating people (sarcasm intended). The government says she cheated but admit that what she did wasn’t criminal. However she didn’t tell the government the truth about her legal activities so she goes to jail. How can anyone support that on ethical grounds? Now Tammy used prescription drugs illegally – so did Rush Limbaugh, Don Imus, The Greatful Dead, the last two presidents, in addition to millions of other people. They’re not in jail because they weren’t part of a Morgan-esque granny-gate. But I believe that most people, if put under oath, would be challenged to tell the whole truth.

Devotion to liberty should be paramount here – if the underlying crime is not a felony it should make us feel very uneasy when the government puts people in jail for lying.

But I would agree that Tammy couldn’t be the sharpest tack in the box. And is clearly morally challenged.]]> http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28030 William Schart Wed, 09 Apr 2008 13:46:20 +0000 http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-28030 Morgan: Good point. As I said in my last post, one can very well question the degree to which TT has been punished. But still, she made some bad choices. She could have very easily admitted to receiving the drugs. She was already banned in cycling and perhaps would not have been subject to criminal prosecution. She could have made a deal. Or, if she was concerned about prosecution for admitting to receiving the drugs, she could have taken the fifth. I don't know what affect such would have had vis a vis her legal career, but at least she could have avoided doing time. And actually, as I think it over, there has been 3 situations: her PED use and subsequent ban from cycling, the perjury conviction and prison sentence, and being barred from a legal career. There are many career fields where a record is an absolute bar, and many others where, while not a black-letter bar, would at a minimum, make it very hard to actually land a job.
Good point. As I said in my last post, one can very well question the degree to which TT has been punished. But still, she made some bad choices. She could have very easily admitted to receiving the drugs. She was already banned in cycling and perhaps would not have been subject to criminal prosecution. She could have made a deal. Or, if she was concerned about prosecution for admitting to receiving the drugs, she could have taken the fifth. I don’t know what affect such would have had vis a vis her legal career, but at least she could have avoided doing time.

And actually, as I think it over, there has been 3 situations: her PED use and subsequent ban from cycling, the perjury conviction and prison sentence, and being barred from a legal career. There are many career fields where a record is an absolute bar, and many others where, while not a black-letter bar, would at a minimum, make it very hard to actually land a job.]]> http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-27981 Morgan Hunter Wed, 09 Apr 2008 11:36:52 +0000 http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-27981 William, I am not defending TT - I am merely addressing the "punishment" aspect...it just seems a bit uneven...one is very much left feeling that while the MAIN characters are getting hand slaps - "someone" has to be publicly made to pay - probably "not the brightest" of lights in the universe - and - "when questioned" concerning this issue - wouldn't her "answer" be used against her to convict...? ---just so you know - my granny - I visit her regularly (TIC) - she now has started pumping iron - got a prison tattoo that says "Chrisie" - she wears a "butch cut" - rolls up her prison togs with her camels in the sleeve...and all because she wanted to do a splif... (ticTICtic)
I am not defending TT – I am merely addressing the “punishment” aspect…it just seems a bit uneven…one is very much left feeling that while the MAIN characters are getting hand slaps – “someone” has to be publicly made to pay – probably “not the brightest” of lights in the universe – and – “when questioned” concerning this issue – wouldn’t her “answer” be used against her to convict…?

—just so you know – my granny – I visit her regularly (TIC) – she now has started pumping iron – got a prison tattoo that says “Chrisie” – she wears a “butch cut” – rolls up her prison togs with her camels in the sleeve…and all because she wanted to do a splif… (ticTICtic)]]> http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-27810 Rant Wed, 09 Apr 2008 03:54:00 +0000 http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=483#comment-27810 BLT,<br /> Thanks. Most appreciated. I'm looking forward to finally seeing a printed version in the near future. If you get a chance to read the book, I hope you'll enjoy it.
Thanks. Most appreciated. I’m looking forward to finally seeing a printed version in the near future. If you get a chance to read the book, I hope you’ll enjoy it.]]>